Shaping The Industry
Federal And State Regulations Guide Salons, Protect Consumers
by Amy Thorlin
Two branches of the government at the federal level have a shared responsibility for regulating indoor tanning: the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). FDA regulations deal with the manufacturing and labeling of equipment, and the FTC investigates false, misleading and deceptive advertising claims.
Regulations also currently exist in more than half the U.S. states. State regulations typically cover licensing, operation and business practices of tanning facilities. Local governments also have authority, and regulations can exist on the county or city level.
Food And Drug Administration
The FDA’s rules and regulations are established to cover the manufacturing and use of indoor tanning equipment. There are two laws under which the FDA operates: 1) The Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act regulates the manufacturing and use of timers, tanning equipment, instruction manuals and protective eyewear, and 2) the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act makes it a requirement that equipment labels have a detailed warning and directions for equipment use.
The initial performance standard for sunlamp products—which became effective for all tanning devices after May 7, 1980—was designed primarily for in-home tanning equipment. Due to the increasing growth within the indoor tanning industry, the standard was amended in 1985 to include more stringent regulations for the manufacturing and use of commercial tanning equipment. The new version became applicable for all tanning devices manufactured on or after Sept. 8, 1986.
FDA regulations suggest guidelines that manufacturers should follow in order to provide maximum safety. These regulations are specifically written to manufacturers, but tanning salon owners and operators need to be familiar with them in order to effectively run their salons. FDA regulations include labeling, construction, protective eyewear, warnings, user positioning and timers. The FDA has the right to investigate indoor tanning facilities.
To find out more about regulations, turn to the FDA District Offices, State Radiation Control Offices and Legislative Hotline Numbers sections in the issue. FDA regulations also can be viewed at www.tanningtraining.com under “Regulatory Updates.”
Federal Trade Commission
The FTC has a responsibility for regulating advertising claims that promote the use or sale of tanning services, supplies and equipment. The commission investigates false, misleading, deceptive or unsubstantiated advertising. The FTC looks at both expressed and implied claims. An expressed claim is literally made, and an implied claim is made indirectly.
According to the FTC, the following statements cannot be made:
- “You can achieve a deep, year-round tan with safe ultraviolet light.”
- “No harsh glare, so no goggles or eye protection is necessary.”
- “Tan without the harmful side effects associated with natural sunlight.”
- “No danger in exposure to ultraviolet light.”
- “Our tanning beds help relieve the pain and discomfort of psoriasis.”
It would be advisable to avoid any claims regarding the safety of indoor tanning or that relate directly or indirectly to the healthful benefits of indoor tanning. When promoting the benefits of indoor tanning, certain features can be used, such as convenience, comfort and cleanliness.
For more information, contact the FTC at www.ftc.gov.
State And Local Regulations
More than half the U.S. states are regulated for businesses offering indoor tanning. The specific regulations vary from state to state, but they typically cover the operation, practices and licensing of businesses providing indoor tanning.
According to state regulators, common violations at the state level include operators who are not certified (in states requiring), records not being properly maintained, no owner’s manual, insufficient consent forms, and non-compatible lamps.
It is important for salon owners in regulated states to develop good relationships with state inspectors. Salon owners must remember that when inspectors visit the facility, they are there to do their jobs—protect the public—and not put the salon out of business. They should be allowed access to the facility and treated with courtesy during the process.
Regulations can exist at the county or city level, even if that particular state does not have regulations. There are more than 39,000 local governments in the United States that have the authority to implement regulations.
Change In The Air
It is critical for salon owners and operators to pay close attention to proposed regulation changes at all levels—not only to make sure that compliance is met, but to ensure a voice in the process.
After the FDA’s Technical Electronic Product Radiation Safety Standard Committee (TEPRSSC) heard a proposal in October 2003 for rule changes associated with indoor tanning, the FDA last year was given the green light to develop amendments to the U.S. performance standard for sunlamp products. Current rules that are being considered for change include revised warning labels, addition of warning labels to all indoor tanning purchasing information, modification of the definition of eyewear, more stringent limits on eyewear effectiveness, adoption of maximum timer setting of 3 MEDs, and implementation of coding systems for sunlamps.
Federal changes move at a much slower rate than state regulations, and their impact is far bigger, in that the proposed changes would affect salon operations in all states. Before final acceptance of any changes, the FDA must submit a proposal for final acceptance. The public comment period has not yet been established. The next TEPRSSC meeting is scheduled for May 19, but there has been no indication that committee members will be discussing proposed changes to the performance standard.
The proposal of additions or changes to regulations at the state level has become an increasing trend, especially with regard to teens. It is critically important for indoor tanning professionals to be active in working together to keep watch of proposed tanning regulations. In the past year there was activity on a number of bills.
Bills That Failed
Michigan House Bill 5144 would have created a New Public Health Code to license and regulate tanning facilities. Among other issues, the bill would have required a written warning for tanners, parental or legal approval for clients under 18, posting of warning signs, reporting of all tanning injuries, and creation of civil fines up to $500 a day.
Pennsylvania House Bill 109 would have created state tanning rules that provide for registration of persons operating tanning facilities, require warning signs, demand operational procedures, and impose penalties for noncompliance.
Wisconsin Assembly Bill 572 would have limited the use of tanning devices to persons at least 18 years of age and would have required tanning-facility customers to present photographic identification.
Maryland Senate Bill 209 would have prohibited anyone from tanning under the age of 18 without a doctor’s permission and would have required the guardian to remain at the tanning facility during the visit. Photo identification would have been required for anyone wanting to tan.
New York Assembly Bill 5702 would have mandated frequency of lamp replacement, prohibited salons from charging for protective eyewear, mandated warning-sign language and size, required consumers to sign a consent that they hadn’t been to another salon in the last 30 days, required electronic record keeping for salons, and necessitated that parents be present for signing a warning statement for minors.
New York Assembly Bill 2693 dealt mainly with licensing.
Bills That Passed
California Assembly Bill 2193 was signed into law Sept. 24, 2004. The law makes it illegal for anyone under 14 years old to tan under any circumstances. Up to $2,500 per day for each violation can be imposed. The state still allows 14- to 18- year-olds to tan indoors with a signed parental-consent form. The bill, first introduced in February 2004, was written to make it illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to tan without a doctor’s permission, but activists from the tanning industry were successful in getting the wording modified for the final version.
Florida Senate Bill 2448 was signed in June 2004 to give a free reprieve to the majority of the state’s 1,700 licensed tanning salons. The original tanning rules, written in 1991, offered specific fees that should have been charged for each commercially used tanning device in Florida, and the Florida Department of Health was ordered to conform its tanning-salon fee structure to existing law. Instead, SB 2448 amended the Florida Statutes to allow the Bureau of Facility Programs to charge a licensing fee of between $0 and $250 per device, which permitted the tanning program to continue with its existing fee structure, according to bureau staff.
More in Florida: Shortly after SB 2448 passed, the state Department of Health (DOH) proposed changes to the tanning section of the Florida Administrative Code to incorporate new language and discard language that was no longer applicable, the DOH says. The changes defined terms and added new language that incorporate safety, health and general sanitation requirements to safeguard the public against illness, injury and disease. Representatives from the indoor tanning industry met with the department on Aug. 25, 2004 to give input, and each person at the table was given a chance to speak and make recommendations. A public hearing on the recently revised tanning rules was scheduled for Feb. 8.
New Hampshire 729-FN was passed into law April 22, 2004, and became effective Jan. 1, 2005. The regulations address licensing requirements, age-related parental consent as well as other procedural matters. The new rules require that operators complete a state-approved training program. Each salon is responsible for maintaining a list of the facility’s operators who have been trained in accordance with the rules. The state board of barbering, cosmetology and esthetics will be responsible for regulating tanning. Two salon owners sit on a committee that will make recommendations to the board. A tanning salon owner will be selected by the governor to serve on the board; however, no appointment had been made by press time.
North Carolina Senate Bill 657 was signed into law on Aug. 2, 2004, and became effective Oct. 1, 2004. The law limits tanners under the age of 13 without a prescription.
Ohio Article 4713-19-04 (K) became effective May 1, 2004. It requires for lamp information to be readily available for Ohio State Board of Cosmetology inspectors to verify. For tanning devices that don’t meet the requirement, the owner must remove any shielding so the inspector can check for compatibility. This change was made because frosted acrylics made it difficult to check for lamp compatibility.
Arizona: While it wasn’t introduced as legislation, changes have been made to the state tanning rules to clean up wording and put into writing what inspectors already expect, according to an official with the Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency. The rule revisions became law on Feb. 5, 2005. Changes include: a required 24-hour wait between tanning sessions; mandatory use of remote timers; that children under the age of 18 can tan only with written consent from a legal guardian signed at the salon; compatibility of replacement lamps with the tanning equipment manufacturer’s compatibility sheet; additional required training to be covered, such as determination of skin type and minor and consent forms; and that records of each user’s tanning visits and times must be kept for three years.
Active Legislation
Already there has been a great deal of activity regarding tanning in several states’ new legislative sessions. The following is a list of the most recent bills as of press time.
New Jersey Assembly Bill 976, which was carried over from the last session, would require that tanning facilities conspicuously post warning signs that state “the dangers of using tanning equipment.” The signage would be required to state “indoor tanning has no known health benefits” and “prolonged exposure to UVA and UVB rays may cause damage to the skin and eyes.” The bill provides specifications as to the placement and location of the signage as well as the required language.
Mississippi House Bill 645 was introduced Jan. 12, 2005 by Rep. Mary Ann Stevens and referred to the Public Health and Human Services and Judiciary B committees. This bill would prohibit the use of tanning facilities for minors 14 years to 18 years old unless written parental consent is given in the presence of an operator. The consent would be good for 30 days and must specify the maximum number of tanning visits allowed in the 30-day period. A new consent form would be required after the 30-day period. Records would need to be kept for these children, and criminal and civil penalties would exist if the regulations are violated.
Connecticut Proposed Senate Bill 555, introduced in January, would require the Department of Public Health to establish licensing requirements for tanning facilities “in order to protect the health and safety of the public.” The legislation would prohibit tanning operators from claiming that there are no health risks associated with using tanning devices or that tanning devices yield medical or health benefits; prohibit operators from engaging in conduct intended to mislead, deceive or defraud the public about tanning devices; prohibit persons under the age of 14 from using tanning devices without written consent of a physician; and require tanners between 14 and 17 to be accompanied by a parent on each visit to the tanning facility.
Connecticut Proposed Senate Bill 298, also introduced in January, would prohibit anyone under 18 years old from tanning indoors without written consent from a parent or guardian.
New York Assembly Bill 1599 provides for increased consumer safety standards for the use of ultraviolet tanning facilities. Of note, it requires consent of a parent or legal guardian for anyone under the age of 18. Also, A1599 requires equipment to comply with the standards in the code of federal regulations; provides standards for maintenance of equipment; and details requirements for instruction, sanitation, protective goggles, warnings signs and statements, and record keeping. The bill was referred to the Health Committee on Jan. 21.
Illinois House Bill 452, read and referred to committee on Jan. 26, would prohibit anyone under 18 years old from using a tanning facility—”regardless of whether such a person has the permission of a parent or guardian to use the facility.” The bill also requires that the tanning facility take “appropriate steps” to ensure that no one under 18 uses the facility.
CRCPD
In order to help provide state and local authorities with a starting point for their rule formation, CRCPD—the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors—has developed a set of model regulations known as suggested state regulations (SSRs). CRCPD is a national organization comprised of directors of radiation-control programs from each state.
In July 2003, the SSR-9-Tanning Facilities Part BB Committee completed a version of the Draft Part BB, Recommended Regulations for Indoor Tanning Facilities. The draft completed peer review in December 2004 and was forwarded to the Office of the Executive Directors (OED) for review.
Once it is reviewed by the OED, the draft will go before the CRCPD board for a final approval vote. Once accepted, the draft will become the official revised CRCPD SSRs for tanning. The official revised regulations would serve as a set of model regulations available for states and local authorities.
Conclusion
Lawmakers are increasingly lobbying for stricter tanning regulations, so it is more important than ever for salon operators to have a voice in the decision-making process. To do this, they must be aware of proposed changes, and then take proactive steps.
Salon owners should read through federal regulations thoroughly, and contact the nearest FDA office (listed at www.tanningtraining.com) with any questions. They also should make sure to check with state and local authorities for regulations that exist at those levels. State inspectors can help with questions on state compliance.
Industry organizations such as the Indoor Tanning Association (ITA) actively work to monitor and fight anti-tanning legislation. The ITA recommends that salon owners get to know their state senators and representatives, and also to contact the association if they hear about any potential legislation.
By understanding and ensuring compliance with mandatory regulations on federal, state and local levels, and by taking a proactive approach in the legislative process, salon operators can help shape the future of the industry.
